Skip to main content

About this Show

[untitled]

program was likely cut short due to a recording issue

NETWORK

DURATION
00:24:24

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel 24 (225 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
528

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

San Francisco 8, Lafco 4, California 4, Us 4, Campos 3, Puc 2, Jason 2, The City 2, Eric Burkes 1, Herrington 1, Mr. Chair 1, John Rizzo 1, Mailer 1, Vatican 1, Usf 1, San Francisco Shell 1, Jessica 1, Colorado 1, Facebook 1, City 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  SFGTV    [untitled]  

    April 16, 2013
    4:55 - 5:19pm PDT  

4:55pm
understand that this is coming from ibw, but have we inquired or looked into what if any involvement pg and e has actually had? >> in terms of financing that, maybe violating the code of conduct? >> well, has there been any communications between pg and e and ibw regarding this? >> we have not looked into that specifically as staff. >> because to the extent that, you know, pg and e is legally prohibited from, you know, negatively campaigning against community choice aggregation, right, and to the extent that doing something like that, it could be done in a lot of different ways, not just directly but indirectly so i'm not saying there is any involvement and there probably isn't, but i do think that we need to make sure that we verify that because if there is
4:56pm
some involvement, some connection, i think there is an argument that indirect involvement could be a violation, and so to the extent that, you know, we have legal protections that have been put in place by the puc and the state of california, we need to make sure we avail ourselves of those. >> well, i will check with the city attorney's office and i know the sfpuc will be interested in following up on that as well. >> and again, i don't have no reason to believe there's any involvement but i believe we have an obligation to verify that. >> and jason fried, lafco staff, one thing we did the last time when there was the common sense san francisco which was pg and e using a different name at the time they were allowed to do this kind of stuff, we worked with the puc and the lafco staff put out a spreadsheet, it doesn't cost any money because i think a lot of the supervisors in their
4:57pm
news letters put links to this information, so we have facebook, we have e-mail list, we have a lot of ways we can get has information out that won't necessarily cost any money right now is we're not spending the money we need for later on but we can still get that information out there, so what is reality of the program and using some of the things that those mailers are saying which is completely inaccurate would be a way to start that. >> and one thing we could say is in addition to any kind of like a mailer or mailing that has some information about this, i would also encourage puc, lafco staff to go into the community and there are probably -- i mean, there is dozens, each one of us on the board of supervisors have dozens of organizations and merchant groups, community groups that we can give you information on and we should be going to those meetings and
4:58pm
saying, listen, don't be -- at least have all the facts, and don't be fooled by some of the stuff you're hearing. i think it's important for us to do that, even if we do something citywide, i think that going to the ground level is really important. thank you. >> thank you for all that feedback, we'll take that back to our commission and we'll see what we can do working cooperatively with lafco staff to take these low hanging fruit opportunities to get the facts out. >> thank you, another question from commissioner mar? >> let me to try not to repeat which has already been said by my colleagues, this is a sophisticated propaganda campaign which is spreading misinformation out there, we're being caught flat footed. i feel like jason fried does his best as an army of one but the puc has to be the one that has the eyes and ears with so
4:59pm
much staff and resources than i think jason has and i think for him to be relied on to know what's going on and to give it to you to me doesn't make that much sense. i just reviewed the website for the so-called san francisco shell shock and i think they framed it early on and it's going to be hard to raise awareness to counter that, and i'm hoping that we're looking carefully with our partners. i know w*ef f we've received hundreds of supporters with limited resources as well, but i don't think pr the puc staff you're giving me an understanding that you know what we're up against but i know you know what we're up against and i'll say that even in accept, we were getting non-profit letters from senior organizations, housing groups saying they had concerns about clean power sf, so ms. fox to say you're thinking about what cvo's to think about, we should
5:00pm
have been doing this months ago, our offices are getting e-mails proand cons, there's e-mails coming with a similar mess sang and i hope we follow up with some of the legal questions that supervisor campos is following up on seeing if there is a connection to whoever is doing
5:01pm
5:02pm
5:03pm
5:04pm
>> a lot of the areas that these mailers were sent to, i'm not sure necessarily since we have limited resources that a mailer would be necessary right now, just getting the missing fact sheet out to our friends in the community would cover a lot of the people that have received these mailers already. >> commissioner campos? >> thank you, mr. chair, i want to add another point and i appreciate all the comments that have been made and i do want to acknowledge that i also know that there are limited resources and there are limitations in terms of what we as government agencies can do. i would also say that and encourage the advocate community to also have some role here because as advocates and as private citizens, there
5:05pm
are -- there's flexibility that as government agencies we don't have, so i think that anyone out there who cares about the public being -- given correct information, i would encourage them they seriously consider being involved because we can do certain things but there are limitations on what we can do. >> okay, thank you for your presentation, thank you for listening to our concerns and i'm hopeful we can work together really well to manage a response. we can open up this item for public comment. any member of the public that would like to comment, please come forward. we'll do two minutes per person. >> i'm jessica from the sierra club, thank you for having this
5:06pm
in-depth conversation, we've been concerned about it, we created an sf heart facebook page, we're trying really hard to combat this misinformation but would help us immensely if we had real facts, like how many jobs is this program going to create a work, how many megawatts of energy we will have and what years so we've been having a lot of conversation about this program for a long time, the consultant that's been hired by the sfpuc has a proposal or a plan they've presented that says you're going to have this many jobs, this much renewable generation online and this year, and maybe that program is not completely feasible but what we need is some kind of numbers, we need facts and we need them now. we need more than just the shell contract, we need to know what kind of investment are we
5:07pm
make ining the build-out, how much money are we going to spend, how many jobs are we going to create and that will help us immensely fight this misinformation, we can't fight it without that, unless you have the numbers for how many megawatts you're going to have in the city and how many jobs you're going to have, that's going to be a hard one to sell, we're fighting hard to fight this misinformation, it's great that you're going to continue to have this information, and i urge you to ask the puc to get those numbers to you and have a plan in place as soon as possible, we need to know those details right now so we can maintain a good p.r. and have a good campaign strategy for this, so thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please.
5:08pm
>> good afternoon, commissioners, eric burkes, representing san francisco green party, so just to take off where my colleague left off, first of all, it's really good to see a new commissioner stepping up, especially from district 5 because all of the things, not just clean power sf, but lafco works on our crucial, clean power sf itself, especially in regard to the build-out that jess was talking about is very crucial, it's particularly to district 5 because i'm sure the commissioner knows that there's a great need for jobs and jobs training in that district, and so -- and that gets to the heart of what we've been working on for the past couple of years, working with local power and the sfpuc staff and stakeholder meetings to make sure that we get the most
5:09pm
robust program possible, and the work that local power that we finally got the sfpuc commission after years of fighting for it, the work that local power is doing on combining the local build-out with the shell contract is showing that we can get thousands of jobs per year for the next several years beginning in the program, get hundreds of megawatts of local renewable and efficiency installed in that program and also be able to say that it's 100% green just like pg and e's going to try to do but with the added benefit has the current numbers that it's showing that we can have all the green energy at competitive prices at pg and e rates, so if we get this right and make sure that build-out is done properly, we
5:10pm
can kick pg and e's fiekt, but there have been some drawbacks since the end of september when ed herrington left, we've had a breakdown in communication at our stakeholder meetings and we're not accomplishing [inaudible]. >> thank you. thank you very much. any members of the public who would like to comment? >> john rizzo at the sierra club, welcome, commissioner breed, just looked up on twitter where someone just tweeted that clean power sf supports the keystone excel pipeline, so you know, we should have a clean power sf twitter account as well as a facebook page to counter that. there are some concerns that kind of feed into this campaign that's going on, and the
5:11pm
proposed maximum rate, we think it's too high, it's unnecessarily high. it would lock out a number of san francisco residents from being able to afford it. we think that lower rates are possible for some of the things that eric was just talking about, the puc consultants have shown that using local build-out, you can get lower rates which would allow more san franciscans to participate in clean energy and also get a wider base. thank you. >> thank you very much. any other member of the public who would like to comment? and anyone else, you can please line up in the center aisle, thank you. >> ben david, sierra club, san francisco has a wonderful opportunity to create a cc a
5:12pm
that brings lots of big benefits to the city and its residents including lots of jobs, to get this done, we need puc staff and their consultant to work very closely together, but now they've been having difficulties doing that, you know, one critical area is the rate premium compared to pg and e's for the first year while the program is getting started up. the premium people end up paying will have a big effect on how many people stay in the program and the suck --
5:13pm
success of the program. there are times when a third party that needs to step in and help two other parties resolve their differences and prevent a bad situation. i feel this is one of those times, lafco needs to take an active role however they can to help them get together and make it happen. >> thank you. any other members of the public who would like to comment, and seeing none come forward, i will close public comment. thank you, everyone, for your comments from the public and thank you for the presentation from the public utility commission and our lafco staff. i think it's important to really emphasize, you know, long-term, we're looking at creating our own renewable
5:14pm
energy generation system and currently we have to operate in the current system which includes people who are maybe on the fossil fuel side and the renewable side like shell is and that's the reality we face right now, something similar that i'm looking at this last year, there are municipal quality around the city, we want to make sure we're not dealing with some of the banks with a bad track record with foreclosures, we're operating in the same system that doesn't really, you know, offer a lot of choices. well, ultimately, we're creating our own choice that is going to be based on fully renewable power and to get there, we have to get through the current system, so we are experiencing what i believe are real growing pains, but i know we can get there if we work closely together. i want to thank you for your
5:15pm
efforts. okay. let go on to our next item, please. >> item number 4, status update on the study on how jurisdictions fill vacancies to elected offices between election cycles. >> jason fried, lafco staff, at the last meeting, you instructed to start this study of figuring out how when elected positions become vacant mid cycle how we fill those. we have since then brought on an intern research intern from usf, spencer who's sitting there with us today, we're at the stage right now, the goal just to give you a very quick brief overview of what we're looking at doing is we're looking at various different types of systems because there's no place like san francisco, which is a city and
5:16pm
county in california and that has an independently elected mayor, what we're doing is breaking this study down to multiple categories to try to find similar things with san francisco, so we're looking at other locations that have large populations that are about the city and county, other places in the country, there are places like arlington, virginia, colorado, we're looking how they replace their positions in the county there. we're also going to be looking at the top 10 cities across the nation to see -- that have independently elected mayors to see how they replace position ins the top 10 cities, we're going to look in california, the law dictates how most places do the replacements unless you're a chartered city like san francisco, you can have a different set of rules so we're going to look at all of those locations as well, and determine what is everyone
5:17pm
else's practices and present that in a report. my hope is we'll have a draft available for the march meeting so people can think about what it is, i don't have much more detail than that because we haven't had a chance to analyze all the data that's been collected so far. >> i think what's good to look at is how long positions stay vacant, right now in the city, we have kind of an assessor post that has been vacant i believe since early december and now we're approaching march, that's three months, that position not being filled and we've had all the 800 thousand people, people that are probably eligible to serve are probably 250 thousand people in san francisco and not one of them has been chosen yet to replace either be in the assessor's office or to replace the district 4 supervisor, that's taking a lot time and hopefully we'll have a a
5:18pm
decision made soon, i'm curious other places around california, is there a time frame or a certain length of time they should have that decision made by. >> we have been collecting that type of data, if a seat is vacant for a certain amount of time, there are places they have in the rules, someone gets to choose a seat, if it's left vacant for a certain amount of time, it goes through a different process for reporting, we're planning on including that in the notes. >> glad to hear that. er >> supervisor campos? >> thank you, mr. chair. i appreciate the question and that's the thing that i was thinking about, it would be interesting to see what other jurisdictions do, do they have a requirement that a vacancy be filled by a certain time. in the vatican, you're going to have a conclave happen 10 or 15 days after the vacancy is done, i don't know if a concave is
5:19pm
required here, you do avoid a situation where you have a vacancy longer than you should. >> i'll make sure it is the highlight of the report that we will make sure to pull that section out a little bit and talk about that a little bit more. >> i'm sorry, it's the catholic in me that had to say it. >> any other thoughts on that? >> okay. >> thank yo